I lived in the SF Bay Area in 1984 when the Olympic Games came to LA and Stanford (SF Bay Area) got some of the Soccer matches. I thought it was really cool to have some of the games so close by, but I didn't go to the games. It would have been nice if Chicago had won the bid for 2016, but they didn't get it this time. I'm certain there will be other chances for the U.S. to host the games.
It doesn't bother me that Rio won the 2016 games. I've always wanted to go to Rio. Maybe 2016 will be my chance?
The fact that Chicago lost the bid doesn't mean Rio is better than Chicago or Madrid or any other city. It simply means that the Olympic Committee chose South America for those games. That is not a snub of Chicago or the U.S. It is nothing more than the committee choosing a different city for 2016.
The games are supposed to be for the entire world... when was the last time the Olympics were in South America? Um, never, the closest they have come was Mexico in 1968.
Congratulations to Rio 2016! As for Chicago 2016, good try and better luck next time.
Oh, wait, did someone say that the President had his hand in bringing the games to Chicago? It was a failure of the President that Chicago lost? I doubt it.
Immie
If the games had ben awarded to Chicago, it would have been called a success of the Prez.
Do you really think that anybody, ANYBODY, who was voting for this did NOT know that Obama is from CHICAGO?
What might we gleen from this?